Some Self-Criticism

I am going to make a generalization about my own group. Ahh, finally, you say? Yes! This is some criticism of myself and other atheists: I think that atheists often have a tendency towards snarkiness. Unfortunately we have a tendency towards a condescending, dismissive tone of communication. I see it a little bit in my own writing, in the early posts of Teardrop Souffle, and in the writings of others. (In my own pitiful defense, I think my early posts were funnier than my more recent ones. Sniff.)

And, well, I like funny. But I've sort of started taking my subject matter with more gravity. I think these are some of the most important ideas in the world, and, in my opinion, most people are getting things wrong. Does that sound snarky? I hope not. I'm really trying to be sincere these days. And what's more, I'd like to be listened to. What hope does an arrogant jerk have of convincing anyone of anything?

I was thinking today about, as an athiest, I'm still closeted in my life. My birthday is coming up in a couple of days. I'm hearing "Oh, so you're a Libra?" a lot. This would be a perfect time to say something like, "Oh, Gosh. Actually, I don't agree with star signs at all! I really believe in real science, and education! I actually am have naturalistic world view- I don't believe in supernatural explanations of any kind...." But I never do.

The other day, I received my email newsletter from the brights ("A bright is a person with a naturalistic worldview..."), and I was thinking about how us secular people have a real public relations campaign ahead of us. Supporting this belief is the following excerpt from Dawkins, from the brights' website:

A Gallup poll in 1999 asked American voters the following question: 'If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be an "X", would you vote for that person?' "X" took on the following values: Catholic, Jew, Baptist, Mormon, black, homosexual, woman, atheist. Six out of the eight categories secured better than 90 percent approval. But only 59 percent would vote for a homosexual, and just 49 percent would vote for an atheist. Bear in mind that there are 29 million Americans who describe themselves as nonreligious, secular, atheist, or agnostic, outnumbering Jews tenfold and all other religions except Christianity by an even larger margin.

The "brights" of course, is a neologism, and probably all of us self-identifying as a bright are aware that the new word might not stick. We are desperately hoping it will, though. We are so in need of a positive, easy, approachable umbrella term for a naturalistic, not supernatural, point of view. We are using the word "gay" as our model. We hope that the noun "bright" will take on a new meaning of its own, and that we might be accepted as another group of citizens, like any other, who are capable of empathy, compassion, generosity and neighborliness. I especially hope that we will learn to be a little more "bright", (and by this, I think I mean more generous in spirit).

I found myself fantasizing today about a new sitcom. It could star two atheists. (The names "Will" and "Grace" would work quite nicely for the main characters, but I hear they're taken.) One of the atheists would be typically snarky, impatient with the simple-mindedness of the world, and the other would mainly be just sad for the world. She would always trying her best to be a loving, fair person, and who dedicated herself to helping other people and animals.

Somehow I don't think I will be seeing this show on television anytime in the next 30 years or so. I might just have to make do watching it play out in my own psyche.